Piange Jackson v. Argosy University, on-Line Division;

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
PIANGE JACKSON,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
ARGOSY UNIVERSITY, ON-LINE
DIVISION; et al.,
Defendants - Appellees.
No. 14-16538
D.C. No. 2:14-cv-00166-APG-
VCF
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the District of Nevada
Andrew P. Gordon, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted December 9, 2015 **
Before: WALLACE, RAWLINSON, and IKUTA, Circuit Judges.
PiAnge Jackson appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing
her education discrimination action alleging violations of federal and state law.
We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo a dismissal
* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
FILED
DEC 30 2015
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

-- 1 of 2 --

2 14-16538
under Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6) on the basis of res judicata. Stewart v. U.S.
Bancorp, 297 F.3d 953, 956 (9th Cir. 2002). We affirm.
The district court properly dismissed Jackson’s action on the basis of res
judicata because Jackson raised or could have raised her claims in a prior action
against the same defendants, which resulted in an involuntary dismissal with
prejudice for failure to comply with a court order directing her to file an amended
complaint. See id. (discussing the elements of res judicata, and explaining that a
dismissal under Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b) is an “adjudication on the merits” for res
judicata purposes).
We reject Jackson’s contentions concerning waiver and defendants’ failure
to provide the district court notice of her related action.
Appellees’ request for judicial notice, filed on January 16, 2015, is granted.
AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 2 --